Karnataka Court March 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Manager, Vijaya Bank Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-19-2003
Reported in: I(2004)BC268; [2003]116CompCas613(Kar); ILR2003KAR3381; 2003(6)KarLJ413; (2003)IIILLJ419Kant
S.R. Nayak, J.1. The Manager, Vijaya Bank, Padubidri Branch, Padubidri, D. K. District, who is the petitioner in W.P. No. 18335 of 1996 (since reported in Manager, Vijaya Bank v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner [1999] 95 FJR 790 (Karn)) feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned single judge of this court dated February 1, 1999, has preferred this writ appeal.The learned single judge, by the order under appeal has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant.The events leading to the filing of the writ petition be noted briefly in the first instance and they are as follows : The appellant at the request of the third respondent had sanctioned an open loan cash credit of Rs. 3,00,000 and key loan cash credit of Rs. 6,00,000 to meet the working capital requirements. The third respondent had secured four loans by hypothecation of goods/stocks, etc., and also by the personal guarantee given by the husband of the managing partner of the third respondent. The hypothecated goods/...
S. Madhava Vs. Canbank Factors Ltd. and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-18-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC123; [2003]114CompCas703(Kar); 2003CriLJ2568; 2003(5)KarLJ108
K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. All these petitions are considered together for passing a common order since a common question of law and fact is involved. Under the present petitions, the petitioner contends that he is facing prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in several places and in particular at Bangalore, in more than 850 cases in different courts.2. Relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of V.K. Jain v. Union of India : (2000)1SCC709 counsel contends that the petitioner is prepared to give the undertaking as envisaged under ratio and thus prays for exemption under Section 305 of the Criminal Procedure Code from his regular appearance on all the hearing dates.3. The petitioner submits that he is the director of the company. Therefore, under Section 305 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeks an exemption. The facts of the decision of the Supreme Court indicate that the innumerable prosecutions launched against the petitioner under Sectio...
Benedict Nazreth Vs. Lawrence Nazreth and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-18-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant369
S.B. Majage, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant, who was 5th defendant in O.S. No. 24/1997 on the file of the Court of 3rd/Additional District Judge at Mangalore challenging the Judgment and decree passed therein in favour of respondents 1 and 2 who were the plaintiffs. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred hereafter as shown in the impugned Judgment and decree i.e., as plaintiffs and defendants. 3. Brief facts, that gave rise to the present appeal, are : that plaintiffs filed an application registered as P and SC No. 124/96 requesting for grant of letters of administration in respect of properties left by their father viz., deceased late Pabian Bastam Nazreth. Defendant No. 5 contested the matter disputing the execution of the Will deed by deceased. So, converted the said proceedings as original suit and registered as O. S. No. 24/1997 on the file of the trial Court. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they and defendant No. 5 are the sons whereas, de...
Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(89)ECC824; 2003(159)ELT147(Kar)
ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The petitioner a steel industry is seeking a writ from this Court to strike down Rule 3 of the Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules (for short the 'Rules') in terms of a notification dated 25.7.1997 and is also seeking a writ of certiorari to quash an order dated 30.9.97, Annexure 'H' and a letter dated 11.3.1998. The petitioner is also seeking a direction for redetermination of the annual capacity of production by taking into consideration the power factor on the facts of this case.2. The petitioner a public Limited Company is having a Unit at Kolar and is engaged in the manufacturing of M.S. Ingots of both non-alloy and alloy steel. The petitioner was assessed to Central Excise duty under Chapter 72 of the Act. Duty was paid in terms of the said Tariff Act r/w. Section 3 of the Central Excise Act. A new Section 3A empowers the Central Government to charge excise duty on the basis of the capacity of production in respect of goods that the Centr...
G.P.R. Housing Pvt. Limited, Rep. by Its Chairman and Managing Directo ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-18-2003
Reported in: 2005(1)ALD(Cri)7; II(2004)BC235; [2005]123CompCas560(Kar); ILR2003KAR4551; 2004(1)KarLJ446
ORDERSreedhar Rao, J. 1. Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings in C.C. 877/2002 on the file of JMFC, Hospet arising out a private complaint filed under Section 200 Cr. P.C. in P.C.No. 60/2002.2. The petitioners are the accused before the Trial Court. The respondent filed the private complaint alleging dishonour of the cheque issued by the petitioners for a sum of Rs. 7,25,000/- drawn on Federal Bank, Bangalore. The Cheque was sent through Syndicate Bank, Kambli Branch. The Cheque came to be dishonoured with an endorsement as 'insufficient funds.' A statutory notice is issued within 15 days of dishonour and within one month from the date of service, private complaint is filed by the respondent. The accused have appeared before the Trial Court and now in this petition, challenged the legality of proceedings.3. In respect of a development of lay out and allotment of plots to several persons, disputes arose. In that connection, an agreement was entered into ...
Govindaraj Vs. B.S. Rajashekhar and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Kant287; 2003(3)KarLJ567
M.P. Chinnappa, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties.2. The brief facts which led to this appeal are as follows:The appellant-K.M. Govinda Raju filed a suit against the respondent 1 in O.S. No. 6814 of 1995 on the file of the City Civil Court, Bangalore, for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from forcibly evicting him from the schedule property on the allegation that he is the tenant under the respondent 1 in the suit schedule property running a motor-car repair garage in the name and style of M/s. Ganesh Auto Garage. In the suit after contest temporary injunction was granted holding that the appellant/plaintiff is in lawful possession as a tenant and his lawful possession is liable to be protected, the said injunction order was confirmed by the High Court in M.F.A. No. 2994 of 1995 dismissing the appeal, however modifying the order to the effect that he shall be in possession till he is dispossessed by due process of law.3. During the pen...
Narayana Setty and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR3206
ORDERKumar, J.1. The subject matter of these acquisition proceedings is land bearing Survey No. 114/2 measuring 10 Acres 15 Guntas situated at Krishnarajapura, Krishnarajapuram Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore District (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule property'). The said land originally belonged to one Sri Subbaiah Setty. On his death, his legal heirs have succeeded to the estate. However, in the revenue records, the name of Subbaiah Setty continues. Therefore, in the proceedings initiated for acquisition, only the name of subbaiah Setty finds a place. The first petitioner is the grand son of Subbaiah Setty. He has preferred these Writ Petitions purporting to represent the estate of deceased Subbaiah Setty. The petitioners 2 to 9, claims to be the owners of either small bits of land or small houses situated in and around the schedule property. All of them have joined together in these proceedings to challenge the acquisition of the schedule property on various grounds....
Dattaprasad Co-operative Housing Society Limited and ors. Vs. State of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-17-2003
Reported in: ILR2004KAR1892; 2004(3)KarLJ310
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. The petitioners are the registered Co-operative Housing Societies under the provisions of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960 (for short, hereinafter called as 'KSC Act' and 'KCS Rules' respectively). They are aggrieved of the amendment to Section 38 by inserting proviso to the KCS Act by Act No. 6 of 2001. They have filed these petitions seeking for issuance of writ of certiorari to strike down Section 5 of the Karnataka Act No. 6 of 2001, by inserting the proviso to Section 38 of the KCS Act contending that the same is unconstitutional and further sought for such other directions or direction of this Court that it may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of case.2. Certain necessary and relevant facts and the legal contentions urged by the petitioners are adverted to in this judgment for the purpose of considering and answering the points that would arise in these petitions by this ...
State by Sub-inspector of Police Vs. Vishwanatha S. Anchan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-13-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2743; ILR2003KAR1836; 2003(3)KarLJ215
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. The State being aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court dated 7-11-1997 in S.C. No. 40 of 1994 in acquitting the accused respondent for an offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC, has preferred this appeal against acquittal. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that there were some differences between the family of P.W. 1 to 5 and 7 on the one hand and the accused and his father on the other hand. On 29-8-1993 at about 4.30 p.m. P.W. 2 was passing in front of the house of the accused and the accused is alleged to have abused P.W. 2 in Tulu language. Thereafter, P.W. 2 went to his house and reported to his mother about the incident. Thereafter, P.W. 2 after about 20 minutes, left his house to go to the shop of P.W. 6 near the junction of Moodabidri-Shirthady Road. After some time, P.W, 7 noticed that the accused was chasing P.W. 2 with an axe in his hand, On seeing the accused, P.W. 2 took to his heels and when P.W. 2 was near the 'Daivadakallu' situat...
D. Venkatesh Vs. Bangalore University
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Mar-13-2003
Reported in: ILR2003KAR1446; 2003(3)KarLJ223
ORDERKumar Rajaratnam, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent.2. The petitioner's application for appointment in the Bangalore University on compassionate grounds was rejected on the ground that he was over-aged for considering the application.3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Bangalore University at Annexure-A that the petitioner cannot be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds. The petitioner has challenged that endorsement which is placed before me at Annexure-A.4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner's date of birth as appeared in school records is 22-12-1965. In the matter of appointment on compassionate grounds, the Bangalore University has adopted the rules framed by the State Government. The Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996 clearly states that a person seeking appointment on compassionate grounds shall be within the age limit specified for the post in the rele...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »